Politics
The Capitulation Treaty: How the Lebanese Regime Shielded Israeli War Crimes
If the Lebanese state refuses to stand as a shield for its own people, who will hold the Israeli war machine accountable for its savage campaign of devastation?
Israel’s unchecked brutality
The numbers released by the Lebanese Ministry of Health paint a horrifying picture of unchecked brutality: more than 4,000 human lives extinguished; over 12,000 individuals maimed and wounded; an entire nation subjected to calculated terror.
This is not mere collateral damage; it is a systematic logbook of unpunished war crimes. From the deliberate obliteration of entire villages and the engineering of mass human displacement to the calculated targeting of journalists, paramedics, women, and children, Israel has waged an all-out assault on the very foundations of urban, environmental, and cultural life in Lebanon.
Yet, instead of wielding these heavily documented atrocities as an ironclad legal weapon in international courts, the spineless political establishment in Beirut has chosen absolute capitulation. The staggering scale of Israeli war crimes has never been heavier, yet the Lebanese skies continue to be systematically violated by an uninterrupted swarm of hostile drones and missiles.
The US-brokered “agreement”
This ongoing humiliation is the direct result of the treacherous tripartite framework agreement brokered by the United States between Israel and the Lebanese government. Published by the US State Department on the morning of 27 June 2026, this document was masked in the hollow, insulting rhetoric of a “step towards peace.” In reality, it is a formal act of submission.
To understand the sheer malice of this agreement, one only has to look at the ground reality, verified just last week by Amnesty International. The human rights organization issued a scathing indictment, declaring that the Israeli military’s continuous deployment of unlawful mass eviction and non-return orders to terrorize hundreds of thousands of Lebanese citizens constitutes a flagrant, systematic violation of international humanitarian law.
Amnesty’s 2026 investigation – which cross-referenced digital military orders on the X platform, testimonies from the displaced, and open-source satellite analysis – revealed that the Israeli military aggressively expanded its campaign of forced depopulation in 2026. The rate and scope of these illegal expulsion orders drastically outpaced the violations of 2024, proving a deliberate blueprint to permanently flatten homes, destroy civilian infrastructure, and ethnically cleanse large swaths of Southern Lebanon.
Instead of fighting this existential threat, the tripartite agreement – which falsely claims to terminate the state of war and initiate a comprehensive peace treaty under American oversight – effectively forces Lebanon to police itself on behalf of its oppressor. The text makes lofty, empty gestures toward Lebanon’s “sovereignty” and its exclusive monopoly on the use of force, while casually accepting Israel’s dishonest assertions that it harbors no territorial ambitions.
The agreement also establishes a hypocritical, simultaneous mechanism where a phased Israeli withdrawal is conditioned on the Lebanese army acting as a sub-contracted security force. The domestic military is tasked with dismantling the infrastructure of resistance groups and disarming them in “pilot areas,” under the guise of ensuring civilian return. In exchange for this domestic pacification, Washington “pledges” conditional military scraps to the Lebanese army and promises to mobilize international reconstruction funds, provided the state completely chokes off funding to domestic militias and ensures not a single cent of aid reaches those who actually fought the invasion.
But the true crown jewel of this betrayal is Article 13. Facing an immediate and justifiable wave of public outrage, President Joseph Aoun attempted a pathetic public relations maneuver to absolve his administration of responsibility for the agreement’s most damning clause. In doing so, he only succeeded in committing a second, more humiliating blunder, exposing the staggering incompetence and complicity of Lebanon’s ruling elite.
Article 13
The official text of Article 13 leaves no room for creative interpretation. It explicitly demands that:
Israel and Lebanon undertake to take measures based on good faith and demonstrating positive intentions, including ceasing all hostile or antagonistic actions in international political or legal forums, in line with their shared objectives of establishing stable and peaceful relations.
By agreeing to cease all “hostile or antagonistic actions” in international political and legal arenas, the Lebanese state has effectively volunteered to act as Israel’s legal defense counsel. This clause dictates a total gag order. Politically, Beirut has stripped itself of the right to even file a basic grievance with the UN Security Council. Legally, it means a complete freeze on accountability. Under this shameful text, Lebanon is barred from petitioning international fact-finding committees, pursuing justice through the International Criminal Court (ICC), or utilizing any other global judicial body.
The domestic repercussions of this surrender are catastrophic. By signing this text, the government has paralyzed its own internal legal system. The passage of critical domestic laws targeting international crimes will be discarded, active judicial investigations into the slaughter of civilians will be buried, and the high-profile cases of assassinated journalists will be blocked from ever reaching the Judicial Council.
This monumental betrayal was approved and signed off by a prime minister who, in a twist of ultimate institutional irony, once served as a judge at an international court. A man who built a career on the pretense of international law has used his office to immunize the butchers of his own people.
Where is justice?
This raises a fundamental, burning question of legitimacy: Does a corrupt, unrepresentative state apparatus possess the legal or moral right to waive the fundamental human rights of its citizens to seek justice for war crimes? Is the right to prosecute an exclusive luxury of states, or can the victims bypass a compromised government?
From a constitutional standpoint, Article 13 is an absolute illegality. While the Lebanese Constitution recognizes that international agreements hold supremacy over domestic legislation, no two political entities have the authority to contract away the fundamental rights of war crime victims. The right to accountability is an inalienable asset belonging strictly to those who suffered the atrocities – the displaced, the maimed, and the families of the dead.
The state’s sole mandate is to protect its citizens and enforce the rule of law, not to barter away their blood in backroom diplomatic deals. A circumstantial, coercive political agreement cannot simply rewrite or nullify the entire global architecture of human rights.
The separation of state and individual
When evaluating the wreckage of Lebanon’s post-agreement landscape, it is vital to remember that the international legal framework operates on a strict separation between state responsibility and individual criminal liability. This separation explicitly dictates who holds standing before international tribunals.
Article 13 may represent a spineless diplomatic maneuver by a cowardly Lebanese political class, and it undeniably stands as a monumental moral failure that strips citizens of state protection. However, the ultimate saving grace is that the Lebanese government does not possess the legal capacity to execute this betrayal, even if it wants to.
According to foundational international legal precedents, states are strictly prohibited from waiving the prosecution of war crimes. Any political clause attempting such an exemption is dead on arrival, carrying zero legal weight in an international court of law. The four Geneva Conventions leave no room for ambiguity. Articles 51 (First), 52 (Second), 131 (Third), and 148 (Fourth) all explicitly command:
No Contracting Party may exempt itself or any other Contracting Party from the responsibilities incumbent upon it or another Contracting Party for breaches.
These statutes were engineered precisely to prevent an aggressive, victorious military power from forcing a compromised or defeated state into signing “amnesty” clauses that absolve war criminals.
Global justice cannot be overwritten
Because war crimes, forced depopulation, and systematic slaughter fall squarely under the category of peremptory norms (jus cogens) from which no derogation is permitted, this shameful treaty cannot overwrite global justice.
Under the United Nations International Law Commission’s rules on the “Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts“, the forced consent or subsequent waiver issued by a victimized, submissive state cannot legitimize a crime against humanity or absolve the perpetrator of international liability.
Article 13 is nothing more than a worthless scrap of paper. Should a future, legitimate Lebanese administration or independent legal bodies muster the courage to bring these atrocities before the International Court of Justice, Israel cannot use this corrupt framework agreement as a shield.
The tripartite treaty is legally invalid from inception; it stands only as an enduring testament to the cowardice of the Lebanese regime and the predatory nature of its authors. The road to judicial accountability remains open, entirely unhindered by the treason of the ruling class.
Featured image via the Canary
Politics
Exclusive: Your Party CEC holding Sunday no-confidence vote in chair, secretary
As the Canary revealed exclusively on Tuesday, disgusted members of Your Party’s (YP) executive committee (CEC) called for a no-confidence vote in the CEC’s chair and secretary. The call came after their removal of three well-known CEC members for attending a socialist conference. Skwawkbox can now reveal that the motion received enough support to force a vote, which will be held online from 6pm this Sunday, 12 July 2026.
Your Party — Majority support
Skwawkbox understands that a clear majority of members have said they will support the no-confidence motion. A senior figure told Skwawkbox that YP’s parliamentary leader Jeremy Corbyn has been trying to deflect anger or at least postpone the vote to allow times for anger to cool. Some CEC members have tried to dismiss the meeting — quorate under YP rules — as ‘unofficial’.
Angry members backing the vote have said the intransigence of the officers and a refusal to accept diplomatic overtures has made the vote unavoidable. Party rules mean that the three members who were ‘suspended’ will be eligible to attend and vote. They have already backed a call for an investigation into the chair’s and secretary’s actions.
Former Crewe Labour MP Laura Smith has already resigned as CEC vice-chair on 4 July. If the no-confidence motion succeeds, it will remove the chair and secretary from those roles, but not as ordinary elected CEC members.
Featured image via YP
By Skwawkbox
Politics
Defend Our Juries hit with five police raids over alleged Palestine Action video
Defend our Juries activists have been hit with five police raids in one day. The campaign group said the raids were linked to Palestine Action solidarity messages. Three raids were originally reported on 10 July according to an X post:
Defend Our Juries can confirm that at least three home raids have taken place this morning. Individuals who have shared videos online declaring support for the unjustly proscribed direct action group Palestine Action were arrested.
Saving lives is not terrorism.
HOME RAIDS
Defend Our Juries can confirm that at least three home raids have taken place this morning. Individuals who have shared videos online declaring support for the unjustly proscribed direct action group Palestine Action were arrested. Saving lives is not terrorism. pic.twitter.com/yf1I37sWHd
— Defend Our Juries (@DefendOurJuries) July 10, 2026
Defend our Juries posted later that police had carried out a further two raids:
UPDATE – FIVE RAIDED
Counter-terror police have so far raided the homes of 5 out of more than 60 individuals who have shared videos online declaring their support for Palestine Action.
All have taken place in the Midlands.
We won’t be intimidated – more ‘terror’ videos soon! https://t.co/rOVJEbdouH — Defend Our Juries (@DefendOurJuries) July 10, 2026
The group campaigns to defend British rights and liberties against the current authoritarian onslaught meted out by Keir Starmer’s government.
Their website warns:
From the UK Government’s plans to severely restrict jury trials, to judges removing legal defences in activist trials, and the Home Office criminalising protest groups or designating them as “terrorist organisations” – the British justice system is being weaponised to serve corporate interests against our democracy and civil liberties.
A major part of their work is opposing the proscription of Palestine Action:
The unjust ban on Palestine Action was not an accident, it is part of a strategic effort for the UK government to be able to ban whichever group they don’t agree with.
The group claims the ban will inevitably turn into further attacks on basic rights:
They have now also begun sentencing direct actionists as “terrorists” without them ever being convicted on any terrorism charge. If we do not oppose our government’s attempts to corrupt UK law, who will they choose to ban next? Trade Unions? Striking workers? Disability rights groups?
The group also posted a video of Jon, one of their activists, whose home was targeted on the 10 July raids:
Here’s what Jon said that caused counter-terror police to raid his home this morning.
We can all agree that this response is totally absurd and unnecessary. Saving lives is not terrorism.
Palestine Action is not a terrorist group, regardless of the unjust ban.
Lift the ban. pic.twitter.com/L4IOw3iVwY
— Defend Our Juries (@DefendOurJuries) July 10, 2026
You can read more about Defend our Juries here. UK state power is growing more repressive and hard-won rights to free speech and protest are being hacked away. Groups like Defend our Juries are at the forefront of the fight to retain the basic liberties which are essential to democracy.
Featured image via Twitter
By Joe Glenton
Politics
Jarell Quansah receives two-match ban after Mexico red card
England’s last‑16 win over Mexico came at a cost. Jarell Quansah, starting at right‑back in the Azteca stadium, was sent off just before the hour mark and has now been handed a two‑match suspension after FIFA ruled his challenge on Jesús Gallardo amounted to serious foul play. The decision leaves Thomas Tuchel short of options on the right side of defence as England prepare for Norway on Saturday.
Corrupt FIFA extends ban
The incident came in the 54th minute. Quansah slid in on Gallardo, catching him high on the shin. Referee Alireza Faghani initially let play continue, but VAR intervened. After reviewing the monitor, Faghani produced a straight red.
FIFA’s disciplinary committee later confirmed Quansah had breached article 14 of the code of conduct, which carries a mandatory two‑game ban for serious foul play. England cannot appeal. Only Donald Trump can do that. World Cup regulations do not allow challenges to red‑card decisions, apparently.
The ruling means Quansah will miss the quarter‑final against Norway and, if England progress, the semi‑final against either VARgentina or Switzerland.
England not happy with VAR
England were left unhappy with how the VAR review unfolded. Their frustration centred on the sequence of replays shown to referee Alireza Faghani, particularly the initial still frame highlighting the studs‑to‑shin contact rather than the full speed of the challenge, which included Quansah playing the ball before colliding with Jesús Gallardo.
The FA raised concerns about the presentation of the footage, but the disciplinary committee maintained its position. Under IFAB guidance, playing the ball does not mitigate a challenge if it endangers an opponent’s safety, and FIFA judged that Quansah’s tackle met that threshold. The two‑match ban therefore stands, ruling him out of the quarter‑final and any potential semi‑final.
Right‑back dilemma
Quansah’s suspension deepens England’s problems at right‑back. Reece James has not played since suffering a hamstring injury in the second group game against Ghana. Djed Spence, who missed the final training session before the Mexico match, was only fit enough for the bench and came on late.
Tuchel now faces a difficult call. One option is to move Ezri Konsa who has been his first‑choice centre‑back throughout the tournament, across to right‑back. But that would weaken England centrally, especially with Erling Haaland waiting in the quarter‑final. Konsa’s physicality has been crucial, and removing him from the middle would leave England lighter against one of the world’s most imposing strikers.
England have only one natural left‑back in Nico O’Reilly and limited depth on both flanks. The suspension has arrived at the worst possible moment.
The decision comes in the wake of the 12-month ban handed to US striker, Folarin Balogun, after his red card against Bosnia‑Herzegovina. This also drew scrutiny due to political pressure from US president Donald Trump. England’s camp has not publicly linked the two cases, but the contrast in sanctions has been noted across the tournament.
England’s route not easy
England’s path to the final was already challenging. Norway, led by Haaland, present a physical test. A semi-final against VARrgentina or Switzerland would demand defensive stability. Losing Quansah, who had been trusted to start at right‑back in a knockout match, forces Tuchel into reshaping his back line at a critical stage.
The red card itself was a turning point in the Mexico match. England had been in control, but the dismissal shifted momentum and forced a tactical reshuffle. They held on for a 3‑2 win, but the consequences have now stretched far beyond the 90 minutes.
What happens next
England will continue preparations in New Jersey, with medical staff assessing whether James or Spence can contribute more minutes. Konsa remains the most likely emergency option, though Tuchel must weigh the risk of weakening the centre of defence.
Quansah will be eligible to return only if England reach the final.
A costly moment in the azteca.
Quansah’s challenge was not malicious, but FIFA’s ruling is clear — the tackle endangered Gallardo and warranted a stronger sanction. England must now navigate the next two matches without him, in a tournament where defensive depth is already stretched thin.
Tuchel’s side have shown resilience throughout the group stage and last‑16. They will need more of it now.
Featured image via the Canary
By Faz Ali
Politics
How the Clacton by-election, and Count Binface, could damage Nigel Farage
Nigel Farage’s statement on Tuesday afternoon, broadcast live from Reform UK headquarters, was supposed to be sensational. After weeks of relative quiet, Farage teased his intervention with a statement on social media, promising an update on his “future in public life”. The scene was set.
In Trumpian tones, Farage furiously portrayed an anti-Reform conspiracy spanning the political class, press and parliament. He addressed the damaging accusations, centred on unregistered donations of cash and support, but insisted that he had done nothing wrong. The political class was guilty, he said, of employing “foul means” to thwart his political project and “threatening” the security of his family.
Farage resolved to stand down as a member of parliament, promising a “people versus the establishment by-election” and an opportunity to “continue the political revolution”.
Farage’s political calculus is prejudiced towards spectacle. He reasoned that a limited contest in Clacton, the Reform capital of Great Britain, would reconfigure the political narrative – distracting from Andy Burnham’s coronation and sidelining reports of Reform sleaze.
MDU warns Chancellor clinical negligence system ‘not fit for purpose’
Northern Ireland RE curriculum is ‘indoctrination’ – Supreme Court
Farage succeeds when politics is played on his terms. A preemptive assault on the parliamentary standards regime, characterised by populist appeals to “people” and scathing castigations of a conspiratorial establishment, could also restore Reform’s lost momentum.
The wheeze rested on some fairly reasonable assumptions. The purpose of self-imposed by-elections, according to their instigators, is to force a genuine test of principle onto a reluctant political class. If there is a constituency in the country willing to accept Farage’s tale of martyrdom at the hands of a vengeful establishment, it is Clacton.
So the stakes could be controlled. There would be no chance of Reform losing; instead, the likely landslide would be seized upon as a sign of popular vindication. The raw political power of Farage’s victory would delegitimise the parliamentary inquisition.
But in at least one crucial respect, Farage and Reform’s political operation badly miscalculated: their plan depended on opponents playing along.
One by one, the established parties – Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats – acted according to their obvious incentives and declined to engage. Speaking to the Daily Mail on Wednesday, Farage confessed that he had been wrong-footed by this remarkable show of strategic unity on the part of the established parties. Asked if he had considered the possibility of fighting as the only candidate from a major political party, Farage responded: “No, of course not.”
This abstention, following the recent precedent of the 2008 Haltemprice and Howden by-election, upends Farage’s gambit. Reform’s failure to register the possibility that the parties might refuse to engage points to a distinct lack of strategic clarity.
Count Binface, the satirical candidate and self-styled intergalactic space-warrior, has now emerged as Reform’s principal rival. The 2026 Clacton by-election still promises spectacle then; just not on Farage’s terms. Andy Burnham, Britain’s next prime minister, believes Binface is “carrying the hopes of the nation”.
In the 2024 general election, the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green candidates secured a collective 11,399 votes (24.8%) in Clacton. The incumbent Conservative candidate, Giles Watling, placed second with 12,820 votes (27.9%). Assuming much of the Conservative vote in Clacton is resilient – since voters sympathetic to Reform would likely have migrated to Farage in 2024 – there remains a genuine anti-Reform bloc in Clacton.
But Binface’s candidacy does not need to threaten Farage electorally to be damaging. His campaign could prove the perfect counterpoint to the Reform leader’s martyr complex.
As with Liz Truss and the lettuce, a serious political saga – in this case Farage’s finances and political future – could find itself reduced to a single, absurd image. These stories have a habit of embedding themselves in the public consciousness. Already, Ipsos polling suggests that one in three British adults (33%) would prefer Count Binface to win the Clacton by-election, versus 21% who support Farage.
Farage trades in political theatre, and increasingly in internet virality. While he will surely survive his brush with Binface, a protracted campaign against a novelty candidate, whose whole brand rests on attracting attention, could leave some not inconsiderable battle scars.
The source of Reform’s success in recent years, which extended to the Scottish Parliament and Senedd Cymru in May, has been its professionalisation as a political operation. Research conducted since the 2024 general election suggests that a growing number of Britons see Farage as a credible candidate for Downing Street. A by-election in which Reform’s main competitor is Count Binface will do little to support Reform’s argument that it is a serious alternative to the established parties. Rather, the campaign will be characterised as an amusing sideshow as Andy Burnham enters Downing Street. Simply put, Farage will be forced to own the farce he has invited upon his Clacton constituents.
The campaign will also provide an extended platform for Farage’s opponents, including his more conventionally dressed critics, to address his funding controversies. The contest will bring allegations of Reform sleaze into the full glare of the electorate, priming the public for the release of the standards committee report and any resulting sanctions. Labour and the Conservatives can spend weeks honing their attack lines.
But even more pertinently, Farage’s by-election strategy reflects a strategic regression into Trumpian rhetoric. Robert Jenrick, the Reform Treasury spokesperson, has called the parliamentary investigation into Farage “a kangaroo court” and “a stitch-up”. In his Daily Mail interview, Farage said the committee would issue a “completely subjective judgment”, adding: “There’s no objectivity in this.”
Farage’s Trumpist turn might resonate with his base, consolidating support among the converted, but it risks shrinking Reform’s appeal in the long run. According to YouGov polling, a full 57% of Reform voters in 2024 support or strongly support Farage’s decision to call the Clacton by-election, with only 7% strongly opposed. Among all voters, 32% are strongly opposed to the decision to trigger the by-election and 11% are somewhat opposed. Meanwhile, 40% of Reform voters believe Farage has been honest about his financial affairs, compared to 12% of the country at large; 60% of the country believes that Farage has not been honest.
For Reform, the greatest danger is that Farage’s populist posturing steers the party away from the median voter and reveals the underlying limits of its coalition.
After all, the extent of Farage’s miscalculation can be explained in terms of what he wanted, and what – in a matter of days – has come to pass.
Farage sought a symbolic confrontation with the establishment – a referendum on his leadership and Reform’s platform in the most favourable conditions imaginable. After two successive by-election defeats, he wanted his own Makerfield moment. He hoped to generate momentum and change the narrative, distracting from damaging media scrutiny. A conquest in Clacton, he calculated, would infuse the Reform project with renewed energy and purpose.
Instead, Farage is defending his 8,405-vote majority against a bin. The lack of a “real” rival will produce a campaign dominated by media scrutiny, thus compounding the very crisis the wheeze was designed to resolve. All the while, the Farage sideshow will be a source of ammunition for camp Burnham as the handover is completed later this month.
Farage turned to Clacton in search of popular vindication, but humiliation awaits.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.
Politics
Netflix’s Little House On The Prairie Cast: Where You’ve Seen The Stars Before
Fans have been anticipating the series since it was first announced to be in the works in 2020, before finally being ordered to series five years later.
Based on Laura Ingalls Wilder’s novels, which were inspired by the author’s own youth, Netflix’s show is the latest in a long line of small-screen adaptations of Little House On The Prairie, which details the lives of pioneer families in the American Midwest in the late 19th century.
If you have already settled down to watch the latest take on the stories and wondered where you recognise the key cast members from, we’ve got you covered.
Here’s our quick guide to everywhere you’ve seen the stars of Netflix’s Little House On The Prairie before…
Alice Halsey

Playing iconic literary character Laura Ingalls is Alice Halsey’s biggest role to date.
The 14-year-old made her screen debut in the Apple+ miniseries Lessons In Chemistry, in which she played the on-screen daughter of Brie Larson’s character, Madeline.
She also appeared in one episode of the recent reboot of Night Court with Melissa Rauch, before a year-long run in the American soap opera Days Of Our Lives.
Alice’s next project will be in the thriller film Ally Clark, which stars Viola Davis and Jason Clarke.
Luke Bracey

Like many Australian stars before him, Luke Bracey’s big break came when he landed the part of high school bad boy Trey Palmer in Home And Away.
After that, his first big-screen performance was in the 2010 Selena Gomez rom-com Monte Carlo, which he followed by replacing Joseph Gordon Levitt as Cobra Commander in the blockbuster sequel, G.I. Joe: Retaliation.
He also appeared in the 2015 Point Break remake, the Oscar-nominated war drama Hacksaw Ridge and in Baz Luhrmann’s Elvis, as the talent manager Jerry Schilling.
On TV, his roles have included Little Fires Everywhere and last year’s The Artful Dodger.
Crosby Fitzgerald

Crosby Fitzgerald is best known for playing Sylvia in the Apple TV+ comedy drama series Palm Royale, and Halle Berry’s younger colleague, Madeline, in Crime 101.
Before her star-making turn, Crosby appeared in small roles in numerous TV comedies, including Abbott Elementary and Awkwafina Is Nora From Queens.
She also played Madison, a friend of the titular character’s stepfather, in the 2025 true crime drama The Twisted Tale Of Amanda Knox.
Skywalker Hughes

Skywalker is still in her teens, but already has some impressive Hollywood credentials under her belt.
Before being cast in Little House On The Prairie, she starred alongside Hilary Swank in the film Ordinary Angels and Kate McKinnon in In The Blink Of An Eye
Her TV work has included the Western drama Joe Pickett and 2024’s Blue’s Clues & You!.
Skywalker will also soon appear in the family film, I, Object alongside Ethan Hawke and Karl Urban.
Jocko Sims

Jocko Sims started his career in 2004 with a one-off appearance in Cold Case, playing a leader of the Black Liberation Front organisation in Philadelphia.
He later had small roles in NYPD Blue, Grey’s Anatomy and NCIS, and has since become best known for playing Anthony Adams in the 2008 TV adaptation of Crash.
More recently, he has had recurring roles in the Michael Sheen drama Masters Of Sex, the action series The Last Ship and the medical show New Amsterdam.
As for Jocko’s film career, his credits include the Jake Gyllenhaal war film Jarhead, the musical Dreamgirls and the post-apocalyptic sequel Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes.
Warren Christie

NBCU Photo Bank/NBCUniversal via
You may recognise Warren Christie for his performances as construction mogul Ray Cataldo in October Road, firefighter Scott Rice in Chicago Fire or Bruce’s childhood friend Tommy Elliot in Batwoman.
Over the course of his two-decade career, Warren has also had minor roles in The L Word, Battlestar Galactica and Happy Town.
Meanwhile, if your guilty pleasure is a Hallmark movie, you may well know Warren from his many appearances in the network’s original films, including 2020′s If I Only Had Christmas, 2021′s Crashing Through the Snow and 2024′s Our Holiday Story.
Alyssa Wapanatâhk

Alyssa Wapanatâhk is probably most well-known for having played Tiger Lily in Disney’s 2023 live-action film Peter Pan & Wendy, which co-starred Jude Law as Captain Hook.
Last year, she also appeared in Cottonmouth, a Western starring Ron Perlman and Esai Morales.
Her biggest TV role, meanwhile, was appearing in the seventh season of Riverdale as Lizzo, a Southside Serpent in 1955.
Barrett Doss

Kelsey McNeal via ABC via Getty Images
Barrett Doss is most recognisable for her role as Victoria Hughes in both Grey’s Anatomy and its spin-off series Station 19.
Her other small-screen credits include playing a young Liz Lemon’s great-granddaughter in the 30 Rock finale, Megan, the personal assistant at Rand Enterprises in Iron Fist, and the recent Netflix rom-com The Noel Diary.
Mary Holland

If you regularly watch comedy, you will have likely seen Mary Holland in action, with some of her on-screen credits including Silicon Valley, Parks And Recreation and The Good Place.
Mary’s biggest role to date came when she was cast as Tanya Logan in the Rose Byrne dramedy Physical, followed by leading parts as Sloane in the Netflix comedy The Woman In The House Across The Street From The Girl In The Window and as Nat in Apple’s sci-fi dramedy The Big Door Prize.
More recently, Mary played Puritan Patience in the American remake of the BBC sitcom Ghosts.
Michael Hough

Since making his screen debut in 2011, Michael Hough is now probably best known for playing a sawmill employee in the Stephen King adaptation Chapelwaite.
He has also played an Orion pirate in Star Trek: Strange New Worlds and, more recently, appeared as Tom Quigley in the Irish black comedy Obituary.
Wren Zhawenim Gotts

Still just 12 years old, Little House On The Prairie marks the start of a promising career for young actor Wren Zhawnim Gotts.
Before the Netflix period drama came calling, she was best known for playing Young Bonnie in the MCU miniseries Echo.
Little House On The Prairie is now streaming on Netflix.
Politics
Do Short-Form Educational Videos Really Help Us Learn?
I have the internet to thank for many of my hobbies, including crocheting and baking. I’ve even fixed minor household issues with the help of some handy YouTube clips, and probably wouldn’t have built the skincare routine I swear by without some input from online forums like Reddit.
But when it comes to short-term videos – the ones we scroll through endlessly on social media sites – learning from educational content might be an illusion, a new paper has found.
The study, published in Communications Psychology, found that while the clips grab our attention and keep us engaged, they might impair our ability to actually remember what we’ve learned.
The research relied on three studies
The study authors conducted three studies comparing short-form educational videos with more conventional teaching methods.
They took ten-minute documentary footage and chopped it down into multiple social-media-style short-form videos. Though these were far shorter, they contained all the same information as the longer footage.
1) Students were less likely to remember short-form video footage in both the short and longer term
In the first study, researchers didn’t tell 180 students they were being tested. They showed short clips to some and the uninterrupted documentary footage to others, then surprised both groups with a quiz on the videos both right after they’d watched them and a day later.
People who consumed the shorter-form content performed worse on the immediate quiz.
Then, they told a group of 185 students to pay attention to the videos they were watching because they were about to be quizzed. Those who watched the short-form version of the footage fared worse on the immediate test and scored lower again the day after.
2) MRI scans showed that shorter-form video content activated different parts of the brain
The researchers also put 59 new participants into an MRI scanner and watched their brains as they consumed either documentary or short-form video footage.
Those who watched the longer-form content saw better synchronisation of the superior parietal lobulem, a part of the brain responsible for attention and integrating sensory and visual inputs. This was also true of the precuneus, which orchestrates things like self-awareness, episodic memory, and making sense of visual events.
Basically, it looked like the documentary watchers’ brains were building mental “maps” of the information.
The brains of the participants who watched the short-form content, though, only synchronised the regions that deal with in-the-moment attention and short-term focus. They were more alert, but that alertness might have actually worked against their memory formation rather than assisting it.
3) Short-form videos seemed to break a connection key to memory formation
Lastly, the researchers measured functional connectivity, or how well different regions of participants’ brains communicated with one another, when watching different content.
To form a memory that sticks, the parts of our minds that handle visual and auditory input have to “talk to” the sections responsible for executive control and decision-making.
But this research showed that short-form content seemed to break that communication. Essentially, their minds seemed so busy processing the stimuli placed in the more action-packed format that they didn’t have as much capacity to bundle it away into a lasting memory, too.
The paper said this could mean “the fragmented and rapidly switching nature of typical social media short videos enhances bottom-up attentional capture at the expense of top-down cognitive processes critical for deep learning and long-term memory consolidation”.
In other words, though you might be taking in more in the short term, you could be learning less in the long run.
Politics
Mosque replica on loyalist bonfire reveals moribund ‘culture’ circling the drain
Loyalists in the village of Moygashel have torched a replica of a mosque, sparking predictable outrage. There’s little question the action was a grotesque, hateful display, and such sentiments represent a real material threat to Muslims, as recent racist pogroms prove.
What the blaze truly shows, however, is a dead-end loyalist culture that will ultimately burn itself out through its own bigotry and parochialism. Its only hope may lie in the embrace of its core tenets by reactionaries beyond the north of Ireland. This is perhaps the punt being taken by the pyromaniacs of the County Tyrone village, and those elsewhere in the Six Counties — the decolonial term for the north of Ireland — this summer.
On July 8, Moygashel Bonfire Association (MBA) gave a glimpse at the crudely constructed representation of the Islamic faith, hidden partially by a sheet. The next day they attempted to defend it on the basis that it was an:
…exercise in our rights under Article 10 of the ECHR [European Convention on Human Rights]…
They went on to ramble incoherently about immigration, without clarifying why their opposition to that necessitates inciting violence against an entire faith. The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) disagreed on the legality of the display, and arrested a 56-year-old man, who they’ve charged with incitement to hatred. The PSNI claim they were intent on removing the display and holding it as evidence. To prevent that outcome, the creators of the bonfire then chose to set it alight, saying:
Due to confirmation of contractors moving in and removing the bonfire, the decision has been made to light it asap.
![]()
Yearly hate-fest shifts from sectarianism to new bigotries
Those celebrating the 12 of July typically light bonfires the night before on 11 July. The yearly festivities represent a ‘culture’ with only its past to look forward to, with sectarian antagonism at its core, commemorating Protestant King William III’s victory over Catholic King James II at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690. While the sectarian element remains, with revellers still frequently burning the Irish tricolour flag, the focus has shifted more towards other displays of hate.
Moygashel loyalists has gained a reputation for this. Last year the County Tyrone village burned an effigy of refugees in a boat. Recently, the 93% Protestant, and 98% white locale gained notoriety for subjecting its own children to racist and Islamophobic AI-generated slop. Locals put up a banner depicting a group of dark-skinned, seemingly Muslim men attempting to gain access to a children’s playground.
The homogeneity of Moygashel and the idiocy of its output are not a coincidence. This is the inevitable product of loyalism and its stunted, deeply insular ideology. A culture that begins and ends with the following — we like to burn stuff, and we hate anything that deviates from our extremely narrow sense of identity — one that calcified several hundred years ago on the basis of violence and supremacy over others.
These are people trapped in an endless siege mentality, perpetually fearful of the destruction of their ‘culture’. The irony is that the obsessive narrowness of this attempt at self-preservation ultimately dooms it to extinction. Just as the absence of genetic diversity leads to a lack of evolutionary resilience in organisms, so loyalism cannot survive the extreme scarcity of ideas it allows to permeate its Orange membrane.
A monopoly on brutal sectarian violence might have ensured the culture could dominate for centuries, but post-1998, force is no longer the currency that determines outcomes in the north of Ireland. As in peacetime anywhere, brain power matters much more than muscle power. A column in the Herald observed the difference between republicans and loyalists in this regard 26 years ago:
The republicans have swapped their balaclavas for starched suits and a place in government, while most of the loyalist groups are conspicuous only by their struggle for ghetto supremacy. Whether you agree with them or not, their nationalist opponents have at least political republicanism to draw on.
Even inside the Maze, where loyalist and republican prisoners were segregated, the loyalist prisoners indulged in raves, drugs, and weight-training. They built themselves up physically, while their arguments grew flabby. In prison republican libraries were stocked with books on politics and history, the loyalist libraries were stocked with weight-lifting manuals.
This was a contrast often highlighted by Progressive Unionist Party politician David Ervine, who sought to steer loyalism along a more enlightened path until his premature death in 2007 at the age of 53. His journey from Ulster Volunteer Force bomb-maker to socialist peacemaker is a route today’s bonfire builders could benefit from studying.
Loyalists’ insular culture and its inevitable demise
In 2020, the News Letter pointed out that in 2014/15:
…of students entering university in NI [Northern Ireland], 29.5% were Protestant, and 45.3% Catholic…
They went on to say the gap has likely only grown since. Rather than funnelling young Protestants into college lecture halls, loyalist paramilitaries usher them into prison cells, via racist riots. These criminal gangs might be happy enough to convert a generation of youths into fodder for their racketeering.
Other loyalists, however, might want to consider the sustainability of doubling-down on the myopic hatred which started with Catholics as the target, and has now shifted to migrants, people of colour and Muslims. A long, hard look at the link between extreme under-appreciation of alternative perspectives, and extreme underachievement, is long overdue.
Escaping from a cultural ghetto might mean actually embracing what 1,400 years of Islam has given the world. That would include vital contributions to mathematics in centuries past, and today’s capacity for Muslim-majority countries to achieve some of the lowest rates of violent crime in the world.
“Delivering sour grapes from a withering vine”
Reflecting on this might enrich the people of Moygashel more than giant pyres of pallets, and the absurd notion that all two billion adherents to Islam are a combination of Osama Bin Laden, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi and Jihadi John.
Similarly, recognising that the north of Ireland’s economy depends on migration, particularly in healthcare, might be more useful than sealing yourself in an Ulster-shaped Orange tomb which no one from outside ever wishes to enter.
The outlandish bonfire displays of hate are intended as a show of strength, of defiance. The Moygashel Bonfire Association’s banner reads “Delivering hard truths from solid roots”. “Delivering sour grapes from a withering vine” might be more apt. No one who is actually strong feels compelled to go around announcing it constantly.
The reality is that loyalists’ effigies, like those in the Tyrone village, demonstrate quite the opposite of strength. They highlight a decaying, moribund ‘culture’ gripped by fear. Fear of the migrant, fear of the Muslim, fear, at some reptilian level, of its inability to halt its own hastening demise.
Politics
Madonna’s Danceteria Lyrics: Who Is Everyone Mentioned In The Confessions II Song?
It’s a very exciting time to be a Madonna fan.
Not only has the Queen of Pop’s latest release Confessions II got some of the most glowing reviews in her 40-year career, she’s just topped the UK albums chart for the first time since 2012.
What’s more, Confessions II cut Danceteria has also become her first solo top 40 single on this side of the Atlantic, proving people are still up for hearing from the trail-blazing star even four decades into her career.
Hype around Danceteria was strong even before its release, after it was prominently featured in Madonna’s Confessions II short film, in a star-studded sequence featuring a host of A-list cameos.
Danceteria itself also namechecks a host of key figures from Madonna’s past, who she used to rub shoulders with at the titular nightclub before shooting to fame in the early 80s. Some of them were friends of hers from back in the day, some went on to achieve huge success in their art form, and some are even still in Madonna’s life all these years later.
With Danceteria quickly becoming one of Madonna’s most talked-about songs in years, we’re running through some of its lyrics with a quick guide to everyone who gets a mention in the song…
‘Meet this boy called Martin Burgoyne, he’s my best friend, he’s my Boy Toy…’

Patrick McMullan/Getty Images
A visual artist who was a pivotal part of the downtown art scene in 80s New York, Martin Burgoyne befriended a young Madonna at Danceteria and later became her roommate.
The two worked together numerous times in the early years of her career, and after years of friendship, he eventually became one of the first people in her life to die from AIDS-related causes.
During the final stages of his life, Madonna paid for Martin’s medical bills, as well as an apartment for him that meant he could be nearer St. Vincent’s Hospital, where he received his treatment.
She later paid tribute to him on her Erotica album track In This Life, and in 2023, when Madonna turned her song Live To Tell into a memorial to those who died in the AIDS crisis, Martin’s face was the first projected onto the stage.
“He was really cute: blond curly hair, earrings up his ears, plaid golf shorts, Doc Martens, black frames, and a white t-shirt with a sweater vest over it,” Madonna told Interview magazine earlier this year, while recalling their first meeting.
“He’s like, ‘You look lost’. And I was. He said, ‘Come with me. I’ll get you in’. And he just crashed to the front of the line.”
She added: “Everybody knew him. He said hi to everybody. The doorman opened the velvet rope. He brought me in and my whole life changed.”
‘Cut to the front, there’s Haoui Montaug…’

Patrick McMullan/Getty Images
Haoui Montaug ran the door at several iconic New York clubs, including the Tunnel, Studio 54 and, of course, Danceteria.
At Danceteria, he was also in charge of the club night No Entiendes, where Madonna performed her debut single Everybody back in 1983 (he can be seen introducing her at the beginning of the video below).
In the early 90s, after being diagnosed with AIDS, Haoui held what became known as a “suicide party” to say goodbye to his loved ones (including Madonna, who is reported to have attended over the phone) before taking his own life the following morning.
‘Get on the elevator, I run into Debi Mazar…’

DMI/The LIFE Picture Collection/Shutterstock
Debi Mazar is an actor, TV personality and life-long friend of Madonna’s, having previously appeared in the music videos for hits like Papa Don’t Preach, True Blue and Music.
The two also met at Danceteria, where Debi used to work on the lift (as mentioned by Madonna in her lyrics).
As the singer put it to Interview magazine: “[Debi] was 16 when she was working there and lying about her age. She was going to the Wilfred Academy of Hair & Beauty Culture and we hit it off right away.
“She used to put the elevator on hold, like press the emergency button, and come out and dance with me.”
Madonna added: “She had the most incredible looks all the time. Her face was beat. Her hair was done. I kept going, ‘Damn, girl, how do you look so good? I have three pieces of clothing and I don’t even know how to do my makeup’.”

Debi also described Madonna as her best friend during an interview with Watch What Happens Live in the early 2010s.
Since her Danceteria days, Debi’s screen credits have included everything from the films Goodfellas, Empire Records and Malcolm X to the popular TV series L.A. Law, Entourage, Ugly Betty and Younger, plus lending her voice to Maria Latore in the Grand Theft Auto games.
Notably, she’s also the only person name-checked in Danceteria to also appear in its accompanying visual.
‘Then I see Mark Kamins is the DJ, he’s the DJ, hide the cocaine…’

Steve Eichner via Getty Images
As you can probably guess, Mark Kamins was one of the DJs at Danceteria at its heyday, who helped Madonna out majorly by playing a demo of her song Everybody, which eventually became her debut single, during a night out.
In Interview last month, Madonna claimed she specifically used to go to Danceteria in an attempt to “butter up” the DJ, with whom she’d briefly go on to work in the first years of her pre-fame career.
As she put it: “He saw me as a complete stalker. Someone would say, ‘There’s Mark Kamins’, and I’d go sit next to him and say, ‘Hey, I know you’re the DJ here and I’ve been working on this music and I’d love to get a chance to play it for you if it’s possible’.
“He was cute and I was turning on the charm as much as I could, and he’d be like, ‘Do you know how many people bother me about wanting to play me their demos?’. He left, but I kept harassing him. I just kept coming back.”
She continued: “Eventually I ended up in a bathroom with Mark Kamins, and I saw him snorting coke. He’s dead now. I can say that.
“He was a wonderful guy, but he did a lot of things people did in the ’80s that they shouldn’t have done. You know what I’m talking about […] So anyway, I brought him some coke in the bathroom, took him in the stalls, me and Debi […] So anyway, we made out, we did a little blow, and then he agreed to listen to my demo.”
‘There’s Fab 5 Freddy…’

Like many of the people name-checked in Danceteria, Fab 5 Freddy was a burgeoning artist in the era Madonna’s hit is set, at that time mostly dabbling in large-scale graffiti art.
He is now considered a pioneer in the hip-hop scene, and was previously name-checked in Blondie’s Rapture “rap” back in 1981, too, before putting together the film Wild Style and going on to become a VJ for MTV’s flagship hip-hop show.
‘…and Basquiat…’

Jean-Michel Basquiat is among the most influential artists of the 20th century, rising up through the New York graffiti scene before turning his hand more to painting in his own signature style.
He and Madonna dated in 1982, at a time they were both on the cusp of a breakthrough in their professional careers, though the future Queen of Pop said that his continued use of hard drugs was what ultimately led to the end of their relationship.
“He wouldn’t stop doing heroin,” she told Howard Stern decades later, adding: “He was an amazing man and deeply talented. I loved him.”
Madonna claimed that after their split, he made her return two paintings of his that he’d once gifted her, which she later learned he’d destroyed with black paint.
In 1988, he died of a heroin overdose at the age of 27.
‘…Keith Haring…’

Artist and activist Keith Haring’s distinct drawing style is immediately recognisable, and has been referenced in Madonna’s career dating all the way back to her Borderline video in 1984.
His work incorporated heavy themes including issues around race, drug misuse and the AIDS crisis, and is recognisable by its colourful and uniquely-shaped drawings of people and animals.
Keith died as a result of complications from AIDS in 1990. In 2023, he was also among the figures included in Madonna’s tribute to those lost in the AIDS epidemic on her Celebration world tour.
‘…and Kenny Scharf…’

Marc Patrick/BFA.com/Shutterstock
Another artist who came up with Madonna in her Danceteria days was Kenny Scharf, known for his distinctive style that sends up middle-class American iconography, often incorporating cartoon characters from his youth, like the Flintstones and Jetsons.
Still active today, he has turned his hand to various artforms over the years, including sculpture, video and even fashion, and was the subject of the 2020 documentary Kenny Scharf: When Worlds Collide.
‘Everyone came from Shafrazi – Sha-fra-zi, to the beat…’

Allan Tannenbaum via Getty Images
Art dealer Tony Shafrazi opened up his own gallery in the late 1970s, which quickly became a key space in the downtown art scene.
The Tony Shafrazi Gallery and Danceteria were both known as a hub for artists of that era (including many of them named in Madonna’s latest hit), eventually closing in 2014.
In more recent years, Shafrazi has become a more divisive figure in the art world due to his vocal support for Donald Trump.
‘There’s Maripol…’

Patrick McMullan via Getty Image
French fashion designer and stylist Maripol was an important figure in the early years of Madonna’s career, helping put together the image that would make her a global superstar.
Most notably, she styled the future chart-topper on her first two album covers, as well as in the music videos for hits Burning Up and Like A Virgin, as well as her inaugural tour, The Virgin Tour.
Outside of her work with Madonna, she’s also collaborated with musicians like Cher, Grace Jones, Sir Elton John and Blondie’s Deborah Harry.
‘…and a guy named Fred’
Alright, you’ve got us there.
Danceteria actually name-checks three different “Freds”, including the aforementioned Fab 5 Freddy and The B-52s’ frontman Fred Schneider, but quite who the mysterious “guy named Fred” is supposed to be is up for debate.
One contender suggested by fans on Reddit is the photographer Fred Seidman, who took Madonna’s pictures for the New York paper The Village Voice years before she made it big.
‘There’s Rock Steady Crew and Crazy Legs…’

During Madonna’s time partying at Danceteria, breakdancing was still very much on the come-up, with one of the artform’s most popular troupes being the Rock Steady Crew.
Their leader was Richard Colón, better known to fans as “Crazy Legs”, whose distinct moves made him one of breakdancing’s most influential figures.
‘Nile Rodgers…’

The co-founder of Chic was instrumental in some of the band’s biggest hits, including Everybody Dance, I Want Your Love and Le Freak.
While Nile Rodgers and Madonna moved in the same circles at Danceteria, interestingly, they wouldn’t work together until she’d already broken through, and he produced some of the biggest hits from her second album, most notably Material Girl, Like A Virgin and Dress You Up.
Still a huge figure in the pop music sphere, Nile Rodgers has quite literally worked with everyone, from Diana Ross, David Bowie and Duran Duran to Mariah Carey, Beyoncé and Lady Gaga. He and Chic are still staples on the festival scene, too.
‘…and David Byrne’

Most of us will know David Byrne best as the guitarist and lead vocalist of the avant-garde rock group Talking Heads, whose biggest hits include Once In A Lifetime, Burning Down The House and Psycho Killer.
Like Madonna, David Byrne is very much still making music, releasing his most recent album in 2025, in collaboration with Ghost Train Orchestra.
He’s also an Oscar winner thanks to his work on the score of the 1987 film The Last Emperor.
‘…the B-52s had money to burn’

Of course, the B-52s had their breakthrough a few years after Madonna with their seminal floor-filler Love Shack.
Quite why Madonna says they “had money to burn” in their Danceteria days remains to be seen, but at least frontman Fred Schneider appeared to see the funny side of it all.
‘Lounge Lizards had so much style…’

David Corio via Getty Images
Saxophonist John Lurie co-founded the band Lounge Lizards in the late 1970s, merging elements of jazz with other popular genres from that time, including punk, new wave and other avant-garde music.
Much like Madonna herself, the Lounge Lizards would often perform at Danceteria as well as frequenting it as patrons.
‘Lower East Side, take a walk on the wild side…’

Although she doesn’t reference him by name, Madonna’s “take a walk on the wild side” here nods to Lou Reed’s similarly-named hit.
To drive her point home, she then launches into the “do do do” section of Take A Walk On The Wild Side, which is why the late Lou Reed is also named as a co-writer on Danceteria.
Lou, of course, is a true icon of the music world, first coming up as a member of The Velvet Underground, before enjoying decades of solo success.
He died in 2013 at the age of 71, and continue to record and tour even in his final years.
Politics
Israeli occupation attempts to assassinate Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem
The Israeli occupation, on 9 July, tried but failed to assassinate Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem.
“Israeli” drone targeted Hamas spokesperson’s car
An Israeli occupation drone targeted Qassem’s vehicle near Abbas Junction, West of Gaza City, on the afternoon of 9 July. Qassem was not in the vehicle at the time. But his bodyguard, Mohammed Al-Fayoumi, was killed. Three others were also wounded, as the car was hit on a crowded street.
Qassem had attended a press conference on 7 July, in which Hamas announced it was dissolving its civilian governing body in Gaza. He told the AFP news agency at the time:
Hamas has taken a new step in that it will no longer be in charge of the Gaza Strip, in order to remove any pretexts for the occupation, which continues its aggression and war of extermination.
Humanitarian worker targeted and killed by “Israeli occupation”
On 8 July, the day before the attempt on Qassem’s life, Israeli occupation forces assassinated Mohamad Fawaz al-Waheidi in Gaza City’s al Sabra neighbourhood. An airstrike targeted the civilian vehicle he was travelling in.
Al-Waheidi was killed just before a public screening of the Argentina–Egypt World Cup match, which he had organised, was due to start.
A respected community leader and the director of the Egyptian Relief Committee in Gaza City, al-Waheidi was known for:
his tireless efforts to resolve disputes and serve his people.
Three other Palestinians were also killed in the targeted attack – including two brothers, aged 8 and 10, on their way home from playing football.
Al-Waheidi’s assassination occurred as Hamas continues talks with Egyptian officials in Cairo, on the second phase of the peace plan.
Gaza “ceasefire” continues to be violated by “Israel”
Gaza’s civil defence agency and health officials say six Palestinians were killed on 9 July 2026. Since 7 October 2025, the occupation has killed at least 73,110, and injured more than 173,599 people.
Although a “ceasefire” agreement was signed in October 2025, the Israeli occupation continues to violate it. Air and artillery strikes are still targeting displacement areas. The entry of humanitarian aid continues to be blocked. Demolitions are still occurring inside the “yellow line”. At least 1,092 Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire began, on 11 October 2025.
Featured image via the Canary
By Charlie Jaay
Politics
Strictly Come Dancing 2026 Cast: All The Line-Up Rumours So Far
So… erm… what exactly is going on with the casting announcements for this year’s Strictly Come Dancing?
Back in June, Strictly bosses surprised fans when they began unveiling stars from the upcoming line-up months earlier than normal, with EastEnders favourite Lacey Turner the first to be confirmed.
In the days that followed, Dani Dyer and Delta Goodrem were also revealed to have signed up, and after a week’s break, hairstylist Chris Appleton became the fourth star announced.
After that, there was nothing for three weeks, until Cach Mercer became the fifth contestant (and second Love Islander…) to be announced.
However, this inconsistency hasn’t stopped rumours from spreading about other celebrities who could be hitting the dance floor in 2026, with a host of stars from the world of TV, sport and beyond tipped to be taking part.
While we wait for more news from the BBC, here’s a quick guide to which celebrities have been rumoured for Strictly 2026 so far…
Josie Gibson

Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
Way back in March, daytime favourite Josie Gibson was named by The Sun as the “first celeb lined up” for the new season.
Josie first rose to fame as the winner of the final series of Big Brother in the Channel 4 era, and since then, she’s become known for her appearances on This Morning and I’m A Celebrity.
The tabloid’s “source” claimed that bosses had been hoping to get Josie to sign up for years, and that they’re “hoping this year is the year”.
Josie later downplayed the rumours, insisting she’d “had nobody contact me” about an appearance on Strictly, and that the whole thing was an April Fool’s joke.
Dame Sarah Storey

Anthony Harvey/Shutterstock
Dame Sarah Storey is a British sporting legend, with a whopping 19 gold medals from the Paralympic games – in both cycling and swimming – and 75 world records to her name.
In June, The Sun cited a source who said that for her next venture, Dame Sarah had signed up for Strictly and was “really excited to be learning a new skill”.
Before that, she had signed up for what would turn out to be the final season of Dancing On Ice on ITV, but had to withdraw from the series before it began due to injury.
Jeff Brazier

Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
At the beginning of June, The Sun claimed that Jeff Brazier had been approached about taking part in Strictly, three years after his eldest son Bobby Brazier competed on the show, finishing as runner-up in the live final.
Jeff, best known as a TV presenter, previously competed on the celebrity version of Race Across The World with his younger son Freddie, having also taken part in reality shows like The Farm, Celebrity MasterChef and Dancing On Ice.
Following Bobby’s stint, Jeff said he had turned down the chance to appear on Strictly so as not to step on his son’s toes, but the tabloid claims he’s now had a change of heart…
Melanie Walters

DAVID HARTLEY/Shutterstock
To millions of viewers, Melanie Walters is best known for her work as the loveable Gwen in all three seasons of Gavin & Stacey.
In late June, The Sun reported that Melanie had “signed up for Strictly”, two years on from the show-stopping finale of Gavin & Stacey, which aired on Christmas Day in 2024.
Kristian Nairn

Marion Curtis/Starpix for HBO/Shutterstock
When it was confirmed that Dani Dyer had signed up for Strictly 2026, it was no major surprise, as she’d originally been booked to compete a year earlier, until an injury sustained during training meant she was no longer able to compete.
However, Dani wasn’t the only Strictly star who had to bow out early last year.
Like the Love Island winner, Game Of Thrones star Kristian Nairn also had to withdraw from Strictly 2025 on medical grounds, leading many to wonder if he, too, has been invited back for this year’s run.
Kristian is probably most well-known for his performance as Hodor in Game Of Thrones, but he also appeared more recently in the comedy Our Flag Means Death.
Jake Quickenden

Jake Quickenden is a reality TV veteran at this point, famously finishing in second place in the jungle mere weeks after being voted off The X Factor back in 2014.
Since then, he’s also appeared in Celebrity SAS: Who Dares Wins and Dancing On Ice, which he won the year the ITV skating show was revived in 2018.
The Sun has claimed that, since Jake joined the cast of the CBBC series Jamie Johnson FC, Strictly bosses are now considering him to be “in the BBC stables”, therefore “part of the gang” and a suitable candidate for Strictly 2026.
Tom Parker Bowles

Last year, Tom Parker Bowles was named in the press as a hot favourite for the Strictly Come Dancing line-up, but ultimately wound up not being part of the cast.
Tom is best known for being a food critic and writer – plus, as his name suggests, the son of Queen Camilla and her first husband Andrew Parker-Bowles.
Because he was reported to be at the top of producers’ wishlists in 2025, many outlets are already suggesting that he might make it onto this year’s series instead.
Roman Kemp

Alright, this is one we’d say should probably be taken with a pinch of salt, but stay with us.
In mid-June, former Strictly Come Dancing finalist Emma Barton was being interviewed by Roman Kemp on The One Show, where she took a moment to reflect on her time on the BBC competition series.
She claimed: “It’s nerve-racking, isn’t it? And it’s scary?”
“Roman, you know, as well…” Emma added, to which Roman quickly interjected: “I have never done it! I’ve never done it.”
However, the faux pas led many to question whether Emma may have let slip something that she shouldn’t have, with Roman having been named in the press as a potential Strictly contestant numerous times in the past.
For now, at least, the BBC is staying tight-lipped on all Strictly Come Dancing casting rumours, ahead of the show’s return to our screens in the autumn.
-
NewsBeat6 days agoTaylor Swift and Travis Kelce wedding staffer hilariously struggles to keep her cool while checking in megastars
-
Fashion5 days agoOpen Thread: What Great Books Have You Read Recently?
-
News Videos4 days agoWhats Hidden Inside This Cash Register? #treasure #reselling #money
-
Fashion2 days agoLoro Piana Fall 2026 Enters Houston’s Art Scene
-
Fashion9 hours agoWeekend Open Thread: Nutriplenish Leave-In Conditioner
-
Tech4 days agoAnthropic’s new “J-lens” reveals a silent workspace inside Claude that mirrors a leading theory of consciousness
-
Business5 days agoAXT Shares Jump Nearly 14% as Semiconductor Materials Maker Rebounds on AI-Linked Indium Phosphide Demand
-
Sports4 days agoJoshua Pacio ‘more complete’ ahead of ONE rematch vs Malachiev
-
Crypto World6 days agoSouth Africa proposes crypto tax guidance under existing rules
-
Crypto World5 days agoSK hynix (000660.KS) Stock Dips as $28B Nasdaq ADR Offering Drives AI Memory Expansion
-
News Videos5 days agoBest Time to Enter Small Caps Right Now? Another Bull Run? | Financially Free
-
Crypto World5 days ago$1,000 Credit Alert! BlockDAG X Exchange Pre-Registration Now Officially Open, Polkadot Dips & Zcash Rebounds
-
Tech6 days agoLenovo laptops are now shipping with YMTC SSDs, a sign of Chinese NAND entering the mainstream
-
Tech3 days agoAnthropic brings Claude Cowork to mobile and web as usage data shows most users aren’t coding
-
Sports4 days ago
We have punished the disrespect
-
News Videos5 days agoAvoid entering in FOMO #bitcoin #cryptocurrency #trading #scalping
-
Tech7 days agoNeuralink Threads Its Way Straight Through the Brain’s Armor
-
Crypto World4 days agoBinance lists Strategy’s STRC stock as company expands Bitcoin funding
-
Crypto World7 days agoBitcoin Miner IREN Falls After $700 Million CEO Stock Award
-
Tech4 days ago9 Best Keyboards (2025), Tested and Reviewed

You must be logged in to post a comment Login